A U.K.-based screenwriter is suing Disney and Pixar for copyright infringement and breach of implied contract, claiming that Cars and Cars 2 are based on a story and characters he submitted circa 1993.
In his lawsuit* filed March 14 in U.S. federal court, Jake Mandeville-Anthony alleges that "he sent copies of his works to various production companies, including Disney" and "met in person" with Jim Morris, then an executive at Lucasfilm, and gave him copies of his project.
(Morris, of course, joined Pixar in 2005 and was named General Manager and Executive Vice President of Production in September 2008.)
Mandeville-Anthony says in his complaint that he sees overwhelming similarities between his creation and the Cars franchise. Thus, he's seeking an injunction to stop the release of Cars 2 on June 24. Super timing, don't you think?
The Hollywood Reporter's Hollywood, Esq. blog, which broke the story a few hours ago, reports that Mandeville-Anthony recently sued Disney/Pixar in the U.K. The judgement in that case is sealed, suggesting that one of the parties views it as being prejudicial to future civil cases.
The only thing I can say about all this is, Not again. It seems that with every Pixar film somebody comes out of the woodwork declaring that the studio stole their concept, with no regard for the facts.
Monsters, Inc. is a prime example. A seemingly well-meaning social worker by the name of Lori Madrid, encouraged by friends and relatives, sued Pixar with a similar story and also sought a preliminary injunction to stop that film from being released.
Pete Docter, as director and co-writer, had to take the stand literally hours before Monsters, Inc. was scheduled to open on November 2, 2001 to defend his own integrity and that of the studio.
The presiding judge refused to issue the order. He later dismissed the entire lawsuit, ruling that the film didn't have anything in common with Madrid's work, apart from some general ideas that are not subject to copyright protection in the first place.
Less than a year later, another artist sued. Litigation lasted over three years, until Pixar agreed to settle out of court in order to avoid another trial.
(The cases are recounted in fascinating detail in chapter nine of David A. Price's The Pixar Touch.)
As for Cars, director John Lasseter has never been coy about his inspiration. He's loved cars since since he was kid. His dad worked at a Chevy dealership. After a road trip through America in 2000, Lasseter finally settled on a story.
*The case is Jake Mandeville−Anthony v. The Walt Disney Company et al, 2:11-cv-02137-VBF -JEM, United States District Court, Central District of California (Western Division − Los Angeles)
Posts
14 comments:
Well, if it's happened before and Pixar has dodged the bullet every time then I don't really think we have anything to worry about here. Although I must say, I would have some certain words in mind for that guy if he did cause Cars 2 to be destroyed. Time will tell with this one, I suppose... and he's got 3 months to stop Cars 2.
Mixed emotions... I has them lol
I mean, Cars... the 'least good' of all Pixar movies is now idea of some unknown guy? If this were true, i'd prefer Pixar no to steal anything.
Cars was released in 2006. All Pixar movies take around 4 years to complete, so I don't see how Jim Morris joining the company in 2005 would have had any significant input into the story and characters of Cars.
The big question: why didn't he sue Cars 1? Seriously....
I would hardly consider Cars to be the "'least good' of all Pixar movies." It has a giant following, has its own "Land" at the Disneyland Resort in California and is the 2nd Pixar film to get a sequel. Clearly it's a hit.
Wow, this is pretty stupid. I guess he just FORGOT to complain when the first Cars came out. These sorts of cases -- that is, cases of stolen intellectual property -- are virtually impossible for the plaintiffs to win. There's no way in hell he's going to stop Cars 2 from reaching theaters. At most, he can hope for a settlement, and not because he deserves one, but because Disney has better things to do with their money than waste it on litigation fees.
All commenters so far have raised great points. Jim Morris joined too close to the time when Cars was already mostly finished.
Why didn't this suing guy go after Pixar when the first film came out? He's only raising a fuss now because the Cars franchise has grown in popularity. (But why didn't he do it when they were making Cars Toons, Cars video games, Cars toys, and Mater and the Ghostlight?
Well, Doc Hollywood was released in 1991, so who stole the idea anyway?
I think what many naive people fail to realize is that to truly have a case over an "idea" one would have to prove beyond a doubt their idea was almost entirely unique, and that no other influences or ideas could have been part of a final product.
I recall back in the late 70's an entire animated TV show being devoted to anthropomorphic cars and motor cycles, so clearly that angle is not original at all. And the en story line of Cars was obviously a classic "slick dude encountering his comeuppance and learning a little something from simple folk" tale, which I can think of at least 4-5 movies and shows that did that over the years. The most obvious recently would be Doc Hollywood. So basically, the story and general ideas were not that original at all, but the execution and follow through were great.
Like most successful stories/movies, it's not about being uniquely "original" anyway, but about HOW it's told and being able to connect to its audience. The guy has no case at all.
Jesper- MJF should have voiced McQueen.
Great points raised above.
I guess the guy just wants publicity. And, as you can see, he's getting it.
And, come on, everything is inspired by something or the other. It's no big deal. It just depends on how the work is executed.
This is about as stupid as it gets. Seriously, after reading a couple of reports, I fail to see a convincing similarities aside from perhaps "Cars as Characters", which have existed ever since the 1940s. Is Mandeville really that self inflated to think only HE could come up with a premise so original that PIXAR must've stolen from him. This is like if Chevron tried PIXAR for character copyright infringement.
Exactly as "E" said.
If he has a case, why didn't he sue for Cars 1, or during all this time when the merchandising for Cars has still been going strong?
I have just copyrighted the letter "o". Yu cannt use it anymre. It's mine, all mine.
Is anyone going to sue james cameron for stealing pocohontis?
Post a Comment